TORONTO -- With one month to go before the NHL's collective bargaining agreement expires, the league and players seem no closer to a deal than when talks began in June.

In fact, the divide may have grown even further.

It took commissioner Gary Bettman less than 24 hours to conclude that the first proposal from the NHL Players' Association held little appeal for the owners.

"There's still a wide gap between us with not much time to go," Bettman said Wednesday.

"I do think it's fair to say that the sides are still apart -- far apart -- and have different views of the world and the issues," he added.

They were hardly encouraging comments for those hoping to see the league avoid its second lockout in as many negotiations, and the third on Bettman's watch. The current CBA expires Sept. 15 and Bettman has already made it clear that the league will enact a work stoppage if a new deal isn't in place by then.

On Tuesday, the union put forth a proposal that included a smaller percentage of revenues for players over the next three seasons in exchange for an expanded revenue sharing program to help struggling teams. The NHLPA estimated that players would be giving up US$465 million in salaries if the league continued on its pace of seven per cent growth each season.

However, that math didn't add up for the league.

"I think it's fair to say that we value the proposal and what it means in terms of its economics differently than the players' association does," said Bettman. "I think there still are a number of issues where we're looking at the world differently. I'm not sure that there has yet been a recognition of the economics in our world -- and I mean the greater world and the sports industry, taking into account what recently happened with the NFL and the NBA."

Both of those sports leagues went through recent lockouts before ultimately seeing the players' share in revenue reduced. The NHL's initial proposal called for a significant reduction from 57 per cent to 43 per cent, when factoring in changes to the way revenue is calculated.

It would be nowhere near that drastic in the offer put forth from the NHLPA.

Donald Fehr, the union's executive director, bristled at the parallels Bettman drew to other sports leagues -- "every sport has its own economics," he said -- and indicated that the gap in talks was created by the NHL's initial proposal in July.

"There's a pretty substantial monetary gulf which is there and when you start with the proposal the owners made how could it be otherwise?" said Fehr. "I mean consider what the proposal was: It is 'let's move salaries back to where they were before the (2004-05) lockout started, back to the last time.' That's basically what it was.

"'We had a 24 per cent reduction last time, let's have another one.' That was the proposal. That's what creates the gulf."

The sides broke off from talks with two completely different offers on the table and no meaningful negotiation sessions planned for a week. They'll gather again in Toronto on Aug. 22.

Fehr was disappointed the owners weren't more receptive to what he viewed as two significant concessions in the NHLPA's offer -- the fact it included the hard salary cap won by owners in the last round of negotiations and called for a drag on the amount of money they're paid.

The strong words and wide gap left many feeling like another lockout was in the offing. There wasn't much Bettman could offer when asked what he might say to fans concerned about the possibility.

"I don't have an appetite either to not have hockey, so we're all in agreement on that," Bettman said. "I know what the game means and I know how important it is for our franchises and our game to be healthy from an economic standpoint and we're working very, very hard.

"It takes two sides to make a deal, it takes two sides to negotiate and it takes two sides if it all goes bad. We're working very hard hopefully to keep it from going bad."

I am pretty POed that the PA took so long to respond to the NHL's offer, but I am once again more angry with the owners. They are being so damn greedy; if you wanted to make more money, you should have hopped on board with an NFL or MLB team. The turnaround on NHL teams are not fantastic.

I was confident about the league starting on time until today... I think neither side will budge much more and they are apparently still very far off. I liked the NHLPA's proposal (what I saw of it). The revenue share makes a lot of sense to me, as well as the luxury tax. I also liked how they didn't just throw out a ridiculously one-sided deal like the NHL; they offered a few solutions that were good for both sides.

The stability of the NHL requires that ALL teams are healthy, period, point blank. Minnesota spending 100m for 2 players is part of the problem.

Teams like Phoenix that are draining money directly off the NHL's bottom line is part of the problem.

Teams in small outlets that lack the resources to pay and keep their finances even is part of the problem.

Having 6-8 teams out of 30 that makes as much as 5 or 6 times the amount of a smaller team and have that franchise pocket that entire amount is part of the problem.

The NHL is 30 teams strong. It is not singly Detroit or Pittsburg, etc. strong; no matter how much those teams make, it's the 15+ smaller outlet teams that are draining the money and pushing the NHL into potential bankruptcy. When you allow 100m to be spent on two players, a sum that could feasibly buy you an entire NHL franchise, that's a problem.

Make no mistake, Bettman only cares about the big city teams and caters directly to them. This is not the 60's or the 70's anymore, the economy is toast and if the NHL doesn't enact a profit sharing plan that will keep smaller club teams fluid and enact a cap hit max of 5m per player, per team, per year, you will see teams fall apart and go extinct, OR as Bettman has proven by his sheer stupidity, he'll have the club continue to run in the negative, cost the NHL tens of millions or more, and his rationale is that he doesn't want to lose that market that team is in....REALLY? Here's an idea, you wouldn't lose the team if you used the finances the NHL made to keep them solvent, instead of taking on a financially broken franchise and pump money into it. If the money's not there, let it go. Cut your losses. It'll do nothing but strengthen the league until a time comes where a city can support a team; Winnipeg comes to mind.

Then again, if you're really that stupid Mr. Bettman, and I believe you really are, Oakland would love their Seals back. How about it?

My question: Why the f*ck are they taking 6 days off? I hope to sh*t that each side is meeting separately and continuously for those 6 days and not just sitting around waiting for the next talks to start. They're not giving me much faith that they even WANT to resolve this

Jeez, Oaklandblue... took the words right out of my mouth... and off my fingertips.

We keep hearing about how the state of the league is the best its ever been, yet there are 6-8 teams every year that report they are losing millions of dollars. Where are these teams? Nashville, Phoenix, Sunrise... all of the places Bettman has decided to place teams.

I have always been an advocate of giving unlikely hockey markets a chance; I believe Nashville is a great home for an NHL team. But they just can't compete with the New Yorks, Pittsburghs and Detroits of the league.

Solution? Revenue share the sh*t out of the league and make it fair or dump the franchise and lower the amount of teams in the league (or move them to more traditional hockey markets).

Doing neither of these things results in money loss and sour owners/franchises. The Board of Governors needs to stop being so damn greedy and realize they will never make the money that the MLB does.

I will be patient to see how this thing plays out. I want them to get a deal done, of course, but labor negotiations in all sports are always this maddening. Still a month to go before the Sept 15 cutoff. If that comes with little to no progress, then I will be angry.

More than anything it ticks me off that the Owners are using the threat of a lockout as a bargaining chip. It worked last time, why not this time around? The players come back with some middle ground in their offer and the owners just balk at it.

And ProngerBlues you took the thought right out of my head. The more I read about it the more it seems the owners want it like it is in the MLB. It's what their proposal and position absolutely sounds like.

Idiot owners and idiot commissioner do not seem to understand the NHL does not generate NBA/MLB/NFL like revenue. When the players cave on something - which they did for the 2nd time since the last lockout ended due to the NHLPA finally caving in - it's time for the friggin' owners and the league to actually take some actions ON THEIR OWN and actually give a little.

Does Gary Bettman still want a job?Do NHL owners actually want to earn money from their fans going to games in their cities?

Given Bettman's latest reply to the NHLPA, the answer is clearly, "no." How much do players have to give up when Owners are putting "out of control" years and dollars into player salaries. Players agreed to maintain current things while reducing overall revenues to players. What are the owners giving up? I have not heard ONE DAMN THING about getting the owners under control. Why not???

Bettman and the NHL Owners will force this lockout which completely sucks as a Blues fans, because the Blues solid drafting and management has made them a playoff team again, yet we are going to get screwed by Bettman and the greedy Owners who have been around for the past two lockouts. Note - current Blues ownership has NOTHING to do with this and should not be held accountable at all. It is very unfortunate they took over when the NHL is trying to screw the players for the 3rd time under Bettman's "leadership."

I bet had the NHLPA accepted the realignment plan put forward during the season, Bettman and the Owner's wouldn't be pushing as hard a line right now.

Here's an idea: A class action lawsuit by ALL Season Ticket holders for the 30 teams in the league, for fraud.

If the NHL and the NHLPA are too stupid to make this work, force them to. It's your money.

_________________2009-2010 LGB Official Sponsor of Roman Polak2010-2011 LGB Official Sponsor of the Brad Boyes 2011 2nd round draft pick.2011-2012 LGB Official Sponsor of "The Russian" Evgeny Grachev2013 LGB Official Sponsor of David Perron 2013-2014 LGB Official Sponsor of Jay Bouwmeester

_________________2014-2015 Official LGB Sponsor of T.J. Oshie2013-2014 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk2012-2013 Official LGB Sponsor of Ryan Reaves2011-2012 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko

On February 7, 2006, a settlement was reached in which the trophy could be awarded to non-NHL teams should the league not operate for a season.

Ironically this was enacted when the labor shortage happened the first time. It makes you wonder.

I've considered this for a bit in a sort of 'what-if' sort of thing. What if neither side could meet halfway which looks likely and this was allowed to lapse far enough for a team outside the NHL to call a challenge for the Cup. With the NHL contracts the way they are, the NHL can't field a team to accept the challenge and by doing so, would be forced to default the Cup.

So fielding a team, any team, even a team of fans would, in this instance, win the Cup. Granted, it's only a shiny Cup, but once you had it, consider the amount of interest in it, the ability to acquire funding for a team. Not a league, but a team. One that would compete for the Cup and be made up of the best. And the best would play because that team would be their direct chance to fight for, and possibly win the Cup.

While you have a point there, Oakland, I just need to take issue with something you said. It' not "only a shiny Cup" It's the Stanley Cup. The holy grail of sports trophies. It's way way more than just a shiny Cup. In what other sport does the end trophy have handlers who travel around with it and wear immaculate white gloves when bringing it out for presentation? I'm fairly sure it's also transported in an armored car. Don't think they'd do that for a Lombardi Trophy or a World Series Trophy.

While you have a point there, Oakland, I just need to take issue with something you said. It' not "only a shiny Cup" It's the Stanley Cup. The holy grail of sports trophies. It's way way more than just a shiny Cup. In what other sport does the end trophy have handlers who travel around with it and wear immaculate white gloves when bringing it out for presentation? I'm fairly sure it's also transported in an armored car. Don't think they'd do that for a Lombardi Trophy or a World Series Trophy.

At the end of that post I said, "And without the Cup, what is the NHL?", which of course the answer is just another league of players, playing a sport for money. That alone should show the signifigance of the Cup. I also mentioned that the best would come to play for the Cup, not for money, but to win it. That shows it's value. In reality, it's a big shiny Cup and that's all it is, with the inherent value of a silver-plated punchbowl on a set of large rings. The value of the Cup isn't monetary, it's in its legacy and those who wish to be a part of it. Without any of which, there would be no NHL like we know it now.

If it wasn't so important, this 'shiny Cup', why would I have suggested assembling a team that could acquire it, and build a team of the best purposely to go after and hold on to it, if these players could make tens of millions in the NHL? Who in their right mind would join a team specifically to win a shiny Cup?

My mistake that I didn't point out how awesome and legendary the Cup is (Which I didn't specifically state), but I thought my post inherently showed its value, beyond being a 'Shiny Cup'.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum